Azizi v Roads and Maritime Services [2016] NSWLEC 97

Azizi v Roads and Maritime Services [2016] NSWLEC 97

The acquired land was substratum land acquired for the construction of two road tunnels, and the later use of those tunnels as tolled dual carriage highways, including delivery and operation through a private consortium, did not alter that fundamental physical purpose. Section 62(2) is clear and unambiguous, is not confined by the examples in s 62(1), and none of the exceptions in s 62(2)(a)-(c) applied. The separate question was therefore answered yes.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 August 2016
Procedural Posture
Class 3 Compulsory Acquisition Appeal / Preliminary Separate Question of Law
Outcome
The separate question was answered "yes"; the land was compulsorily acquired for the purposes of constructing a tunnel within the meaning of s 62(2) of the Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991.
Legal Topics
['acquisition of Substratum Land' 'tunnel Construction' 'land Acquisition (just Terms Compensation) Act 1991 S 62(2)' 'availability of Compensation']
['compulsory Acquisition' 'land Compensation' 'statutory Construction'] ['acquisition of Substratum Land' 'tunnel Construction' 'land Acquisition (just Terms Compensation) Act 1991 S 62(2)' 'availability of Compensation']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Class 3 Compulsory Acquisition Appeal / Preliminary Separate Question of Law

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Lots 46 and 79 of Deposited Plan 1208231 were compulsorily acquired for the purposes of constructing a tunnel within the meaning of s 62(2) of the Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991.' 'Whether s 62(2) applies to a road tunnel forming part of the NorthConnex tolled motorway project, despite the project being operated as a commercial toll road.' 'Whether the word "tunnel" in s 62(2) should be confined by reference to the examples in s 62(1).']

Ratio Decidendi

The acquired land was substratum land acquired for the construction of two road tunnels, and the later use of those tunnels as tolled dual carriage highways, including delivery and operation through a private consortium, did not alter that fundamental physical purpose. Section 62(2) is clear and unambiguous, is not confined by the examples in s 62(1), and none of the exceptions in s 62(2)(a)-(c) applied. The separate question was therefore answered yes.

Court Disposition

The separate question was answered "yes"; the land was compulsorily acquired for the purposes of constructing a tunnel within the meaning of s 62(2) of the Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991.

Orders

  • ['Costs are reserved.' 'The exhibits are returned.']